SDY, I can't speak for all the other non-jewish or whatever white people who are anti-WN, only myself. I keep trying to figure out how to explain to you why, since you say you are baffled.

For one thing, WNs seem to believe the white race is in danger of becoming extinct or removed from the halls of power or something along those lines. I don't believe that. So that is reason number one. An academic disagreement.

The next thing is that WNs want to live separately. And that is fine. Maybe even understandable. But WNs want to live separately so badly they are willing to go to the extremes of forced emigration, sterilization for non-willing emigrants, and even all the way to genocide. This is a pure violation of human decency. A moral disagreement.

WNs may feel they are losing the power battle, which I disagree with. Whites are actually overrepresented in the halls of power when you consider their proportion to the world's population. You may feel this overrepresentation is proof of their superiority, I don't know. And WNs may feel that representation is shrinking.

Even if that representation is shrinking, this does not justify violence and genocide. I don't see how you could justify it.

I have another academic disagreement in that I don't believe diversity leads to tension and possibly to some kind of hazy, undefined "race war."

According to the topic I started, some think we are already in a race war. I can only assume they mean in our courts, both judicial and public opinion. And if that is the case, then yes, some people are still finding it necessary to fight for their basic human rights, and I am all for it. In that case, then racial diversity will certainly lead to tension until everyone is equalized.

Since WNs don't seem to believe all men (and women) were created equal, especially blacks, then it follows and makes sense that you don't believe that everyone can eventually work things out and rid themselves of the tension by having equal rights. The slower, dumber, inferior races will drag everybody down and they should be sent away or made to disappear. And we are back to an academic disagreement that has real world application.

Now there are others who are making inappropriate gains under the guise of basic human rights, and if that is all you guys were opposed to, I wouldn't have a problem with that, because I am opposed to the very same thing.

Does this help you be less baffled? That I don't believe the same premises that you do, and therefore think your "final solutions" are in error because of them?

I hope you will forgive me if I present a rather cartoonish analogy. I am trying to find a way to help you see where I am coming from.

Imagine if I told you that I thought UFOs were the cause of lightning, and it was only a matter of time before they hit my house. So I feel the solution is to defend myself against these UFOs and think we should devote more energy to combatting them. And then you come along and tell me that lightning is caused by natural forces and what I really need to do is get a dang lightning rod and install it on my roof. And then I was to tell you I don't understand why you are so opposed to combatting UFOs.

My favorite flavor of ice cream is mocha almond fudge. However, when I turn on the TV, I'm told that Rocky Road is the way to go. I don't like Rocky Road and when I reply so to others, I'm a racist. I don't care if others want Rocky Road, but I prefer to not eat it myself. Yet, I am still an evil bigot. Rocky Road used to be the least favorite and now, to right the wrongs of the past, I'm supposed to eat as much Rocky Road as possible because it's the right thing to do. If I choose to shop stores that do not carry Rocky Road, some Rocky Road liberal will force that store to carry it. But I don't like Rocky Road...

Damn it, now I DO have to go to the store.

This is a rather silly analogy, but my point is that I should be free to associate with anyone I please and not be forced to hug my local negro, crying on his shoulder for the all the injustices never committed against him by people who were never myself.

Originally posted by T. Ekul I am skeptical of predictions from any source.

Then you can't believe anything without touching, seeing or hearing for yourself? Official government sources aren't good enough?

I used to live in SoCal. In the predominately ethnic neighborhoods, everyone has bars on their doors and windows. Why is that? Are blacks afraid that whites are going to come steal their possessions? Come on, THEY know that THEY have a problem keeping their hands off other people's stuff.

The fact that 1 out of every 10 black males between the ages of 25 and 29 is in prison doesn't mean anything to you? How about 1 out of every 5 black males in the LA area are ACTIVELY involved with the judicial system (in jail, in court, on probation, etc.)?

The server would crash if I attempted to list the many thing races have in common.

Yes: arms, legs, genitals, brains, blah blah blah. The server most certainly would not crash if that list you propose in the quotation above discarded features which the human species collectively shares with the animal kingdom, and specifically apes.

Originally posted by XZaapryca Then you can't believe anything without touching, seeing or hearing for yourself? Official government sources aren't good enough?

Official government sources are great. I only said I am wary of predictions.

Quote:

I used to live in SoCal. In the predominately ethnic neighborhoods, everyone has bars on their doors and windows. Why is that? Are blacks afraid that whites are going to come steal their possessions? Come on, THEY know that THEY have a problem keeping their hands off other people's stuff.

The fact that 1 out of every 10 black males between the ages of 25 and 29 is in prison doesn't mean anything to you? How about 1 out of every 5 black males in the LA area are ACTIVELY involved with the judicial system (in jail, in court, on probation, etc.)?

Originally posted by T. Ekul Okay. I guess I was wrong. I appreciate the clarification. I guess I just noticed that some newer posters were taken off time delay sooner than I was and made the mistaken assumption they had never been on one. Mea culpa.

I have noted, though, that the moderation of this forum is among the fairest on the net. During my time here last year, you banned a WN for having a sock puppet.

Thanks.

Quote:

This stuff about racial war prompted me to start the topic "Things I Understand and Things I Don't Understand." Precisely to prevent, or at least minimize, further misconceptions and misunderstandings on my part in the future.

I did see that. You got some good answers, and I hope that I've addressed some of those points in my subsequent posts in this thread.

Quote:

And that is why I am more optimistic than Greco or yourself. Science and technology have time and time again found solutions to problems in ways that could not be anticipated, and in ways that have proven the pessimists wrong time and time again. Sometimes the problems themselves were the driving force behind technological advancement.

I actually do have a great deal of confidence in science and technology. However, the trouble really lies within the political leadership, not in scientific or tech communities.

Quote:

There are plenty of historical similarities. I've been hearing about the problems of the population explosion for over thirty years now. And the deadline for the abyss keeps getting pushed back as we keep passing those deadlines.

Yes, I've heard about the population explosion problem as well, but there have been efforts to encourage birth control and population management on a worldwide scale. It's still an ongoing problem, though. It hasn't really gone away, but predictions of "doomsday" seem to be off the wall. I wasn't necessarily predicting "doomsday" or any kind of image of the future as in "Soylent Green."

Quote:

Maybe you just think some of your references should be picked up by the average middle-class White American. Since you are not the average white American yourself, how could you know for sure?

I would say that my background is about as average as it comes, for a White American. Some of my political views, such as my White Nationalist views, are not average, I will concede. However, on a great many non-WN issues, I think my views coincide greatly with that of Middle White America.

As I said, I didn't crawl out from under a rock, and I've been initiated to and exposed to a number of different viewpoints held by White Americans. I was raised among them, went to school with them, was exposed to the same cultural influences, traditions, and institutions. My views have diverged from the mainstream over the past 10 years or so, but rest assured, I know White Americans very well. I am one of them. Whether they like it or not, there will always be those who think like White Nationalists among them, and there's nothing they can do about it. They're stuck with us, for better or worse.

Quote:

I do not buy into the if-you-aren't-for-us-you-are-against-us argument.

Okay, but consider that what it's really saying is that "if you are not with us, you're no good to us, so you might as well be against us."

Quote:

I think you are remember the hits, and forgetting the misses as far as white-black relations. Are you familiar with that expression?

No, I'm not familiar with the expression, although I can gather its meaning. Are you saying that I'm too cynical, that I tend to overemphasize the negative? It's a fair charge which has been made before. But I'm not really so pessimistic as I might come across.

Quote:

Also, I don't see Whites as "going down" as WNs do. The White race isn't going to vanish. That is in your imagination.

What do you think is in my imagination? I think that there are many very real indications that Whites will eventually be a numerical majority in their own countries. There are many disturbing social trends which show very little sign of abating, as well as virtually unfettered corruption and intrigue in government and the financial world.

When I said "going down," I didn't mean to say that Whites would vanish, at least not right away. They will just continue to be more and more outnumbered, which could conceivably put our posterity in a very difficult and untenable situation. I think that we should take steps to forestall or prevent that.

Quote:

If it is all about survival of the fittest, and whites are the fittest, how could they disappear anyway?

In fact, I don't believe that Whites will disappear completely. If they act according to what is appropriate and necessary for their survival, they will survive.

Quote:

If all WNs were about was stopping black on white hate crimes, I don't think many people would have a problem with you. But in the topic I started, WNs expressed that genocide is a viable option to the world's problems. And that is unacceptable. That is just one place where you guys start to lose your audience.

Sometimes, I think that the message gets confused because of such a cacophony of conflicting opinions and separate agendas within the overall pro-White cause. Would it make any difference if I told you that I don't believe that genocide is a viable option? I don't know whose opinions you were referring to regarding genocide, but keep in mind that there are differences of opinion in that regard.

I think that the best way to avoid genocide, or any kind of "race war," would be to encourage other White people to think and act like White people. White Pride should be encouraged for its own sake, and it doesn't have to mean "genocide" or "hate" or any of these ridiculous sloganistic condemnations you would care to contrive. White people have a right to feel honored and privileged at being born into a worthy and courageous people. Our ancestors built this country from a coastal agricultural republic into a world power. That's an impressive achievement, and I see no reason why one can't feel pride of one's ancestry and lineage.

What has burned me up all too often is the notion that Whites should feel "shame" and "guilt" over our ancestral history. I say, screw that. I oppose anti-racism and the PC thought police, along with their whole agenda.

Quote:

Don't you get it? I'm not anti-White. Nor am I anti-Black. I am anti-hate. And you guys are filled with it.

That's your opinion, and I think you are wrong.

"Hate" is a silly term to use anyway, as it's yet another sloganized condemnation of political dissent.

Quote:

Why would I want to stop forced emigration, sterilization, and genocide? Hmmmmm. Give me a minute. I'll think of a reason.

Interesting spin you put on it. Still, you haven't answered the question.

Quote:

First, you are right about my use of the word "everyone." That is fallacious and I am usually more careful about using such a broad stroke. Good catch.

I was not implying that dwindling resources never lead to upheaval. Common sense would dictate otherwise.

The central point of my posts is that I am more optimistic about the future than others on here appear to be. And I get the impression that some WNs feel that their goals won't be achieved until dire things come to pass first. So their topics tend to be laced with an almost subconcious desire to see these dire things come to pass.

I'll concede that there may be a grain of truth to what you say, but ultimately, we'll all have to wait and see what happens. The desire is for a pro-White society, but there's also a truthful concession that it is not possible under such circumstances that most people are fat, dumb, and happy, due to relative economic good fortune. As long as people's bellies are full, and they have numerous distractions to keep them occupied, why would anyone want to rock the boat? It's perfectly understandable.

What it will eventually turn into is anybody's guess, but just as you might scoff at predictions of "gloom and doom," I think it's equally valid to scoff at predictions of "sunny days and blue skies" indefinitely. I think that there are issues which need to be addressed, and I don't think that they're getting the attention they deserve under the current leadership. Part of this is due to a largely uninformed and apathetic public, half of which doesn't even vote, and the other half tends to follow the path of least resistance. So, therefore, nothing gets done, as we have a bunch of do-nothing, corrupt politicians and bureaucrats who are screwing the public.

Quote:

I am not sure I follow your line of thinking from there as far as the Russian, French and American Revolutions.

I was just wondering if you thought that anyone could have predicted those events.

Quote:

I think hardships come and go because we don't live in a perfect world. There is no way to prevent them from happening. You may be able to work out a means to keep the distances between periods of hardship farther and farther apart, but we will never be able to completely eliminate them. So maybe I'm more of a realist than an optimist. Because these hardships are inevitable, it borders on insanity to blame a particular race or group of people as responsible. It is the fault of the entire human race. Along the same lines of what you were saying, the same causes don't apply to every situation. To repeatedly blame the jews or blacks or whoever is to be guilty of the same thing.

I don't blame non-whites or any particular race of people for the problems of the world. I blame certain ideals and influences, such as multiculturalism, anti-racism, political correctness, liberalism, Marxism, etc. I think that jews played an integral and influential role in the formation and rise of many such ideals which are influential today, but I don't blame all of them as an entire group. If there's anyone who should be blamed, it would be some members of the White race, not jews or blacks.

As for hardships, yes, I agree that they come and go, so I share your realistic perspective in that regard. I'm not saying that WN would be a panacea to absolutely every problem that could conceivably arise. I'm just saying that it would solve a lot of problems which are existent today and will probably exist in the future to an even greater degree than now.

Quote:

They tell it like it isn't. See my last comment.

I did see your last comment. I don't see how it supports your assertion that "they tell it like it isn't." That statement is more fitting of certain mealy-mouthed politicians within our own "moderate" system, who promise the Moon but end up giving us green cheese. None of these guys give a straight answer to even the simplest, most mundane questions. They never express what they really think, for fear that they'll get ostracized and skewered by the "moderate" media.

Quote:

In the words of Winston Churchill: Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

Cute, but unimpressive. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

Mind you, I'm not in favor of tossing democracy aside as a form of government. I think that any government's primary focus should be to carry out the will of the people, although even in a democracy, that's a tricky point which isn't always so clear-cut. Both democracies and dictatorships, have, to varying degrees, similar mechanisms and scourges of the state, and this can not be denied. In short, I see very little room to compare the differences against the backdrop of similarities they share.

By the way, the government which Winston Churchill served wasn't exactly a den of angels, so who the hell is he to talk?

Quote:

Yes. And you blame jews and blacks for the problem. I think ou are off the mark.

See above. I've already addressed this point.

Quote:

I "didn't act White?" ROTFLMAO!

From a certain point of view, you didn't seem to act White.

Quote:

I will do my best to remove your bafflement of why a white person would be opposed to you in the future.

Well, actually, I'm not really all that "baffled," as I actually know the reasons why many White people oppose White Nationalism. But I'd still like to hear it from you. You've already touched upon it with your mischaracterizations of "genocide" and "hate," which would indicate that at some point in your life, someone conditioned you to think and act a certain way.

I honestly don't believe that Whites are being true to themselves when they oppose the pro-White view. As I said, I was born and raised in White America, and if you had any shred of honesty, you would admit that a great many Whites are not so "certain" of their so-called "tolerance" and "anti-racism" as you might think they are. I think that Whites tend to go through a certain inner conflict over the issue, something that they rarely discuss even with other Whites. I'm not saying that it means that they're secretly sympathizing with WN, but I think it could be some form of internal denial to varying degrees.

In addition to denial, I think that there is a certain level of hypocrisy which comes with the modern-day, spoon-fed liberal view which is what anti-racism is rooted in. These spoiled brats were given everything they ever wanted on a silver platter, provided to them by the ideals, traditions, and institutions which they now mock and disdain today. Ingrates and hypocrites - that's what they are.

Quote:

Can I test that claim?

I think you already have.

Quote:

Just my own pet theory, but it sure looks cowardly. Here in the Opposing Views forum, the best and the brightest of the WNs come to play with us. And that is great. I like the challenge. But in the other parts of the forum, there are some WNs who would be eaten alive by the likes of me.

Well, you're certainly welcome to copy and paste any posts you would like to address, start a new thread in General Rants, and have at it. You could also post a link to the originating thread, for reference purposes.

But what would you be accomplishing by doing so, by "eating alive" someone who may not express themselves in the most intellectual fashion? While it is a moderated forum, keep in mind that it's largely open to anyone with a screen name and a valid e-mail address. So, just about anyone with access to a computer can post here, and for most of the posters here, they're just names on a screen for me.

There are quite a few antis who (let's face it) aren't too bright, either, and they're pretty much "easy meat," to continue along the same analogy of devourment. So, I know what you mean, in that sense, but on the other hand, I would rather deal with the "best and the brightest" than those who would be no contest. That's no challenge. In fact, most of the antis who show themselves to be total idiots are the ones who end up getting banned, not the ones who put forth decent, cogent arguments. Those who show that they're nothing but a waste of time and bandwidth are given no quarter here. We have no need for it here, regardless of how entertaining some people might find it.

Quote:

I am skeptical of predictions from any source.

I am, too. In fact, I have a book I purchased back in 1980, called the Book of Predictions. Reading over it today, it's somewhat funny reading all the things they predicted for the 80s and 90s.

Quote:

I don't think America should settle for being anything less than number one, either. I served in our military for 20 years. You won't find a more patriotic fellow around.

While I respect your service to our country, I won't automatically take you at your word regarding your patriotism. Patriotism comes from the heart, not from a uniform, or a flag, or even a piece of paper. These are just symbols, just as the wise words of our Founding Fathers were symbols, but it's more important to follow the spirit of those symbols than anything else.

I think that what we've come to in this country is that we have grown too rigidly attached to symbols, while tossing away the spirit and ideals upon which those symbols were once founded. I don't think that patriotism should be blind, either. While I have a genuine love and pride for my homeland, I'm not so naive as to believe that we became a great power through kindness and benevolence alone. We are who we are, and we became great because of that. Now, there are those who wish to toss it all away, to usurp the same symbols of the Founders of the Republic, and then try to pass it off as "patriotism."

Quote:

Our difference lies in what the reasons for us not being number one are. And so we will be talking a lot in the future.

Originally posted by T. Ekul SDY, I can't speak for all the other non-jewish or whatever white people who are anti-WN, only myself. I keep trying to figure out how to explain to you why, since you say you are baffled.

For one thing, WNs seem to believe the white race is in danger of becoming extinct or removed from the halls of power or something along those lines. I don't believe that. So that is reason number one. An academic disagreement.

It would be fine if you disagreed with it, but you're demonstrating here that you may be confused about certain perceptions and beliefs held by WN. Now, you might take issue with some of the rhetoric, and I'll admit that some of it might qualify as "symbolic speech." But still, I think it's a bit shallow to base your assessment on that. I'll concede that certain aspects of the message may need some brushing up, but hey, it's a work in progress - not necessarily an indication of what the finished product may look like.

So, I'm still a bit baffled as to why you wouldn't examine it with a greater level of objectivity, but moving on...

Quote:

The next thing is that WNs want to live separately. And that is fine. Maybe even understandable. But WNs want to live separately so badly they are willing to go to the extremes of forced emigration, sterilization for non-willing emigrants, and even all the way to genocide. This is a pure violation of human decency. A moral disagreement.

Well, here you go again. You're making assumptions which don't necessarily reflect the views of all, or even most, White Nationalists. This is why I'm baffled, because you're not looking at things objectively, but you're projecting based upon what has influenced and conditioned you throughout your life. Why can't you overcome that? Why can't your thinking take you outside of that rigid box of devotion to symbols, slogans, and propaganda?

"Human decency"? Come on, man. Who do you think you're talking to? I've been around the block a few times myself, and I have learned all too well that this thing called "human decency" is a freakin' myth. There is no such thing. Oh sure, there may be countless examples of "random acts of kindness" and whatnot, but please spare me. If it exists, it certainly doesn't exist in anything you support, or in anything which opposes White Nationalism.

So, before you think you can start playing the "morality" card, you'd better be sure what trump is. When you can project what you think White Nationalists might do, and match that against what liberals, socialists, neo-cons, and all their anti-nationalist fellow travelers have actually done with their stewardship over the mechanisms of power, then I would think that you shouldn't get too smugly self-righteous or self-satisfied with your position.

And I'm still baffled that you don't understand that.

Quote:

WNs may feel they are losing the power battle, which I disagree with. Whites are actually overrepresented in the halls of power when you consider their proportion to the world's population. You may feel this overrepresentation is proof of their superiority, I don't know. And WNs may feel that representation is shrinking.

There may be a grain of truth to this point, however I would point out that it's not so much that I'm worried about Whites losing representation or political/economic empowerment. Obviously, as a race, we're still in pretty good shape, statistically speaking. Having said that, though, I also have to take a look at countries which are not ruled by Whites, where non-whites call the shots and they are left to their own devices.

With the exception of a few Asian countries, most of those countries are third-world cesspools of crime, chaos, civil wars, disease, misery, and despair. Their governments are mostly dictatorships, with revolving military/civilian leadership which is never really stable or secure.

I'm not saying that Whites are necessarily "superior" or anything, but it does stand to reason that if we end up with a majority of people like those in the third world taking up positions of power and authority in America, we will be in serious trouble. You say that it won't happen, but how can you be so sure? Is it really worth the risk? Even if you believe WN to be in error, at least we would be erring on the side of caution, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing. At least we can plan for a rainy day, or even a hurricane or earthquake, as such things do happen.

Quote:

Even if that representation is shrinking, this does not justify violence and genocide. I don't see how you could justify it.

Well, I've already addressed the whole issue of genocide, but as for violence, it's justifiable in self-defense.

I don't know if you have room to talk about violence anyway, since you've said you served in the US military. They've been known to commit acts of violence now and again, however justified you might consider it to be, the facts are there and that's that. I'm not criticizing you for that, necessarily, but you know what they say
about people who live in glass houses.

Quote:

I have another academic disagreement in that I don't believe diversity leads to tension and possibly to some kind of hazy, undefined "race war."

Well, I won't comment on the whole "race war" thing, as I've addressed it already. But how can you say that there's no tension related to multiculturalism and forced integration? You might disagree as to the level and degree of tension, but I don't see how you can deny that it exists.

Quote:

According to the topic I started, some think we are already in a race war. I can only assume they mean in our courts, both judicial and public opinion. And if that is the case, then yes, some people are still finding it necessary to fight for their basic human rights, and I am all for it. In that case, then racial diversity will certainly lead to tension until everyone is equalized.

And when will everyone be equalized? I'm not asking for a time frame, necessarily, but what conditions, in your estimation, need to be met in order to achieve universal equalization for everyone? For many decades, our country lived under the doctrine of "separate but equal," until some people arbitrarily decided that it wasn't "equal" anymore.

If all you mean is "equal rights under the law," well, that's already in place, as has been the case for the past few decades. Now, either the Powers That Be are pulling off the greatest charade since the "proletarian" revolution, or this equalization and diversity isn't all that it's cracked up to be in terms of bringing about racial harmony and reducing tension. There was less crime and less tension during a time when, according to your view, should have had considerably more crime and tension than now. Not only was there more "racism," but also more poverty, so according to many modern notions, the whole country should have fallen apart around 1900.

In fact, much of the anti-racist view was originally rooted in the notion that if measures weren't taken to appease non-whites, they would riot and create insurrection which would cripple our cities, commerce, and national reputation in the world. So, you might consider that anti-racism came about as a result of certain "predictions" which we both agreed are generally useless.

Quote:

Since WNs don't seem to believe all men (and women) were created equal, especially blacks, then it follows and makes sense that you don't believe that everyone can eventually work things out and rid themselves of the tension by having equal rights.

Well, we've had "equal" rights now for nearly half a century, more or less, and yet, I have yet to see any significant progress in terms of "working things out." If anything, things have gone backwards during the 80s and 90s, as anti-racism became more standardized and institutionalized. Just as I mentioned about modern-day "patriots," anti-racists have also tended towards fossilization and over-devotion to the symbolic word "equal," that they seem to have developed an aphasia about the word.

You say that everyone can eventually work things out, but the only appreciable results have been attained by heavy-handed coercion, intimdation, violence, and a virtual gag order on discussion of racial matters at every level of society. So, if that's what you mean by "work things out," then you can have it, thank you very much.

Quote:

The slower, dumber, inferior races will drag everybody down and they should be sent away or made to disappear. And we are back to an academic disagreement that has real world application.

Well, when you start making truer and more intellectually honest statements about White Nationalism, then we might be able to discuss more "real world" matters. Right now, I have to spend too much time correcting your obstinately gross misrepresentations of the WN view.

This is what baffles me, frankly. If you had a realistic, objective view, based on real world considerations, you would have a better understanding of WN. Right now, you seem to be in la-la land, as you speak of "human decency" and "working things out," as if the whole world is run on kindness.

Do you really want to talk about the "real world"? Or would you rather remain in Fantasyland? We can ride a little boat through a winding river of singing dolls representing every country of the world, and all sing "It's a small world, after all." But eventually, the ride ends, and you're still left with the "real world," however "small" it might be.

Quote:

Now there are others who are making inappropriate gains under the guise of basic human rights, and if that is all you guys were opposed to, I wouldn't have a problem with that, because I am opposed to the very same thing.

Does this help you be less baffled? That I don't believe the same premises that you do, and therefore think your "final solutions" are in error because of them?

No, actually I'm more baffled, because you're demonstrating that you haven't read one thing which has been posted in response to your questions. Are you doing this intentionally?

SDY, I think I enjoy my conversations with you more than anyone else here.

Quote:

Originally posted by SDY6401
I actually do have a great deal of confidence in science and technology. However, the trouble really lies within the political leadership, not in scientific or tech communities.

Agreed. Too many politicians are ignorant in the maths and sciences. They make stupid policiy decisions from that ignorance.

Quote:

Yes, I've heard about the population explosion problem as well, but there have been efforts to encourage birth control and population management on a worldwide scale. It's still an ongoing problem, though. It hasn't really gone away, but predictions of "doomsday" seem to be off the wall. I wasn't necessarily predicting "doomsday" or any kind of image of the future as in "Soylent Green."

You weren't, but some people do. And not just WNs. I see it all over the net.

Quote:

I would say that my background is about as average as it comes, for a White American. Some of my political views, such as my White Nationalist views, are not average, I will concede. However, on a great many non-WN issues, I think my views coincide greatly with that of Middle White America.

As I said, I didn't crawl out from under a rock, and I've been initiated to and exposed to a number of different viewpoints held by White Americans. I was raised among them, went to school with them, was exposed to the same cultural influences, traditions, and institutions. My views have diverged from the mainstream over the past 10 years or so, but rest assured, I know White Americans very well. I am one of them. Whether they like it or not, there will always be those who think like White Nationalists among them, and there's nothing they can do about it. They're stuck with us, for better or worse.

Okay. So we are just a couple of white guys who disagree on a few things.

Quote:

Okay, but consider that what it's really saying is that "if you are not with us, you're no good to us, so you might as well be against us."

I don't know if I would interpret it that way. To be against someone is to be a hindrance or aid the opposition. To not be with someone doesn't make them a hindrance or an abetting force to the opposition, necessarily. It is possible to be against both sides of a disagreement, and hold a third opinion. In some areas I support what WNs are trying to say, and in others I am neutral, and still others I am opposed.

Quote:

No, I'm not familiar with the expression, although I can gather its meaning. Are you saying that I'm too cynical, that I tend to overemphasize the negative? It's a fair charge which has been made before. But I'm not really so pessimistic as I might come across.

[/b]

The expression "remembering the hits and forgetting (or downplaying) the misses" is used by skeptics who deal with people who believe in psychics. You got the gist of the meaning.

You don't strike me as that pessimistic. Certainly not as pessimistic as others on here.

Quote:

What do you think is in my imagination? I think that there are many very real indications that Whites will eventually be a numerical majority in their own countries. There are many disturbing social trends which show very little sign of abating, as well as virtually unfettered corruption and intrigue in government and the financial world.

When I said "going down," I didn't mean to say that Whites would vanish, at least not right away. They will just continue to be more and more outnumbered, which could conceivably put our posterity in a very difficult and untenable situation. I think that we should take steps to forestall or prevent that.

If whites are being discriminated against, I'm with you.

Quote:

In fact, I don't believe that Whites will disappear completely. If they act according to what is appropriate and necessary for their survival, they will survive.

Where WNs differ is in the definition of "appropriate and necessary for their survival."

Quote:

Sometimes, I think that the message gets confused because of such a cacophony of conflicting opinions and separate agendas within the overall pro-White cause. Would it make any difference if I told you that I don't believe that genocide is a viable option? I don't know whose opinions you were referring to regarding genocide, but keep in mind that there are differences of opinion in that regard.

It matters a lot to me that you don't believe genocide is a viable option. But there are others who have stated it is in the topic I started. At some point, I stated that I understood that we were now entering into variances of opinion and that they didn't necessarily represent the true WN philosophy. But you have to police your own followers, don't you?

Quote:

I think that the best way to avoid genocide, or any kind of "race war," would be to encourage other White people to think and act like White people. White Pride should be encouraged for its own sake, and it doesn't have to mean "genocide" or "hate" or any of these ridiculous sloganistic condemnations you would care to contrive. White people have a right to feel honored and privileged at being born into a worthy and courageous people. Our ancestors built this country from a coastal agricultural republic into a world power. That's an impressive achievement, and I see no reason why one can't feel pride of one's ancestry and lineage.

Sure. Saint Patty's Day. MLK day.

I asked if people thought that genocide was a possibility. I honestly did not know what the WN position on this was. Some stated it was, but only as a last resort. So I didn't contrive these things.

Quote:

What has burned me up all too often is the notion that Whites should feel "shame" and "guilt" over our ancestral history. I say, screw that. I oppose anti-racism and the PC thought police, along with their whole agenda.

Same here. The idea that some people have about "reparations" especially annoys me.

Quote:

That's your opinion, and I think you are wrong.

Just so you don't have to go back and search to refresh your memory of what this is in reference to like I did, it is your response to my claim that "you guys are filled with it (hate.)"

That was a broad stroke, I admit. But the hate comes through pretty loud from some of the WNs here. And this is the company you are keeping.

Quote:

"Hate" is a silly term to use anyway, as it's yet another sloganized condemnation of political dissent.

Not the way I use it or intend it. I mean it by the dictionary definition.

Quote:

Interesting spin you put on it. Still, you haven't answered the question.

This was in response to my statement, "Why would I want to stop forced emigration, sterilization, and genocide? Hmmmmm. Give me a minute. I'll think of a reason." And that was in response to your question, "Even if you didn't agree with White Nationalism, why would you want to stop it?"

These are some of the options written by WNs in the topic I started. Not me. The basic idea is that once the "race wars" are over, that Whites will have their own governments installed in one or more countries somewhere. At that point, all non-whites will be forced to emigrate. Those who don't want to leave may be allowed to stay, but must undergo sterilization so they don't breed. And if all else fails, genocide.

I have also provided more in-depth posts here about why I am opposed to the WN movement immediately following the one to which you responded. Have you read them yet?

Quote:

I'll concede that there may be a grain of truth to what you say, but ultimately, we'll all have to wait and see what happens. The desire is for a pro-White society, but there's also a truthful concession that it is not possible under such circumstances that most people are fat, dumb, and happy, due to relative economic good fortune. As long as people's bellies are full, and they have numerous distractions to keep them occupied, why would anyone want to rock the boat? It's perfectly understandable.

What it will eventually turn into is anybody's guess, but just as you might scoff at predictions of "gloom and doom," I think it's equally valid to scoff at predictions of "sunny days and blue skies" indefinitely. I think that there are issues which need to be addressed, and I don't think that they're getting the attention they deserve under the current leadership. Part of this is due to a largely uninformed and apathetic public, half of which doesn't even vote, and the other half tends to follow the path of least resistance. So, therefore, nothing gets done, as we have a bunch of do-nothing, corrupt politicians and bureaucrats who are screwing the public.

That post, taken completely out of the context of the White Nationalism discussion board would have me nodding my head in total agreement. I've made similar arguments elsewhere.

Quote:

I was just wondering if you thought that anyone could have predicted those events.

The three Revolutions? Sure. You could see them coming a long way off. That doesn't mean everyone who predicts another revolution is right.

Quote:

I don't blame non-whites or any particular race of people for the problems of the world. I blame certain ideals and influences, such as multiculturalism, anti-racism, political correctness, liberalism, Marxism, etc. I think that jews played an integral and influential role in the formation and rise of many such ideals which are influential today, but I don't blame all of them as an entire group. If there's anyone who should be blamed, it would be some members of the White race, not jews or blacks.

I agree with some of what you say here. You can probably guess which parts I don't.

Quote:

As for hardships, yes, I agree that they come and go, so I share your realistic perspective in that regard. I'm not saying that WN would be a panacea to absolutely every problem that could conceivably arise. I'm just saying that it would solve a lot of problems which are existent today and will probably exist in the future to an even greater degree than now.

I am finding it difficult to find a solid agreement amongst WNs what WN is! If you mean separatism between all races in the context of this quote, I follow. I don't agree, but I follow.

Quote:

I did see your last comment. I don't see how it supports your assertion that "they tell it like it isn't." That statement is more fitting of certain mealy-mouthed politicians within our own "moderate" system, who promise the Moon but end up giving us green cheese. None of these guys give a straight answer to even the simplest, most mundane questions. They never express what they really think, for fear that they'll get ostracized and skewered by the "moderate" media.

What I meant by "they tell it like it isn't" was that WNs or Marxists or other extremists take advantage of hard times and don't present an accurate picture of the causes of the hard times.

During hard times, the people want someone or something to blame and so the more strident voices get more attention because the people are desperate. Each side is half-right at best.
And that is sometimes worse than being completely wrong.

Quote:

Cute, but unimpressive. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

Mind you, I'm not in favor of tossing democracy aside as a form of government. I think that any government's primary focus should be to carry out the will of the people, although even in a democracy, that's a tricky point which isn't always so clear-cut. Both democracies and dictatorships, have, to varying degrees, similar mechanisms and scourges of the state, and this can not be denied. In short, I see very little room to compare the differences against the backdrop of similarities they share.

By the way, the government which Winston Churchill served wasn't exactly a den of angels, so who the hell is he to talk?

That is why Churchill said it was the worst form of government, except for all the others. Democracy is messy. But it is the best thing we have going for us at the moment. Actually, to be more accurate, I think a republican form of government is the best. And that is where we are agreeing to disagree.

Quote:

From a certain point of view, you didn't seem to act White.

I still don't quite understand what that means, but okay.

Quote:

Well, actually, I'm not really all that "baffled," as I actually know the reasons why many White people oppose White Nationalism. But I'd still like to hear it from you. You've already touched upon it with your mischaracterizations of "genocide" and "hate," which would indicate that at some point in your life, someone conditioned you to think and act a certain way.

No. I was open-minded about the question and that is why I started the topic I did. I asked for clarification of what I had come to understand. A couple/few WNs confirmed what I thought I was getting from this site. The forced emigration, sterilization and genocide thing. I was also corrected on a few misconceptions I had, which is great. It is important for me to understand where you guys are coming from to minimize misunderstandings.

Quote:

I honestly don't believe that Whites are being true to themselves when they oppose the pro-White view. As I said, I was born and raised in White America, and if you had any shred of honesty, you would admit that a great many Whites are not so "certain" of their so-called "tolerance" and "anti-racism" as you might think they are. I think that Whites tend to go through a certain inner conflict over the issue, something that they rarely discuss even with other Whites. I'm not saying that it means that they're secretly sympathizing with WN, but I think it could be some form of internal denial to varying degrees.

I think a lot of Whites are embarassed that they are afraid of non-whites, and won't admit it or try to figure out why.

I also know, as I am sure you do, that many whites hide their racism. At least WNs are open about it, I'll give you that much.

Some whites express their racism openly when they are alone with other whites. They assume that everybody else feels the same way, and that is very annoying and insulting to me.

Quote:

In addition to denial, I think that there is a certain level of hypocrisy which comes with the modern-day, spoon-fed liberal view which is what anti-racism is rooted in. These spoiled brats were given everything they ever wanted on a silver platter, provided to them by the ideals, traditions, and institutions which they now mock and disdain today. Ingrates and hypocrites - that's what they are.

Limosine liberals.

Quote:

I think you already have.

This was in response to my jesting question of whether I can test your claim that you don't get upset when someone tells a lie about you. If you feel I have told a lie about you, I assure you it was unintentional. As I am trying to address a great many people, and capture the WN philosophy and debate it, I sometimes use broad strokes. If you feel I painted you unjustly with those strokes, I am sincerely sorry.

Quote:

Well, you're certainly welcome to copy and paste any posts you would like to address, start a new thread in General Rants, and have at it. You could also post a link to the originating thread, for reference purposes.

This is a great idea. I will. As soon as I get myself settled in. I'm still in a learning phase right now.

Quote:

But what would you be accomplishing by doing so, by "eating alive" someone who may not express themselves in the most intellectual fashion? While it is a moderated forum, keep in mind that it's largely open to anyone with a screen name and a valid e-mail address. So, just about anyone with access to a computer can post here, and for most of the posters here, they're just names on a screen for me.

Everyone is a name on a screen to me. But I try to keep in mind that real people are behind them. My "eating alive" statement was in regard to the fact that antis are penned inside the Opposing Views forum. I think that we should be allowed free reign. Not everyone who visits this forum comes here. Why not allow us to take on all comers?

Quote:

There are quite a few antis who (let's face it) aren't too bright, either, and they're pretty much "easy meat," to continue along the same analogy of devourment. So, I know what you mean, in that sense, but on the other hand, I would rather deal with the "best and the brightest" than those who would be no contest. That's no challenge. In fact, most of the antis who show themselves to be total idiots are the ones who end up getting banned, not the ones who put forth decent, cogent arguments. Those who show that they're nothing but a waste of time and bandwidth are given no quarter here. We have no need for it here, regardless of how entertaining some people might find it.

I almost got banned today for making a joke. The topic was posted here in Opposing Views by a WN, so I assumed it was meant to provoke us. I decided to handle it with humor, but one of the forum gods thought that was a bad way to go. It sucks to have a silver hammer slammed down on your head.

Quote:

I am, too. In fact, I have a book I purchased back in 1980, called the Book of Predictions. Reading over it today, it's somewhat funny reading all the things they predicted for the 80s and 90s.

I have an almanac that is a few decades old. It has predictions from psychics all the way up to today's times. Hilarious stuff. And the vast majority of it is doom and gloom. We're all supposed to be dead by now.

Quote:

While I respect your service to our country, I won't automatically take you at your word regarding your patriotism. Patriotism comes from the heart, not from a uniform, or a flag, or even a piece of paper. These are just symbols, just as the wise words of our Founding Fathers were symbols, but it's more important to follow the spirit of those symbols than anything else.

Correct. Not everyone in the military is patriotic. To some it is just a job. Don't believe the commercials.

Quote:

I think that what we've come to in this country is that we have grown too rigidly attached to symbols, while tossing away the spirit and ideals upon which those symbols were once founded. I don't think that patriotism should be blind, either. While I have a genuine love and pride for my homeland, I'm not so naive as to believe that we became a great power through kindness and benevolence alone. We are who we are, and we became great because of that. Now, there are those who wish to toss it all away, to usurp the same symbols of the Founders of the Republic, and then try to pass it off as "patriotism."

A parasitic culture is actively trying to destroy us at every minute of everyday, befouling the legacy of what our ancestors fought for. If freedom to live as one pleases, in an environment with ones one kind is frivolous than what is important?